Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.

This forum page has been archived. Please do not make any further edits unless they are for maintenance purposes.

Update Final: We lose, show's over. Following November 3rd, enter your preferences and select the "Monobook" skin as your personal choice. I'm right sick of this. Damn the torpedos, I'm going to throw my 20,000 edit weight around and pull some friggen strings for once. Monobook will be my editing standard, it should be yours too. NittyTok. 04:41, October 18, 2010 (UTC)

Poll

Should we ask Wikia to allow us to keep the current Monaco skin?

yes The old way is way better it's hard to navigate without the sidebar thing on the left, plus why fix what's not broken. -Sindrie

yes Keep it the way it is currently please. Easy navigation is a must and The Vault is perfect in its current format. willooi

yes Please put it back its easy to use and not confusing like the current one --92.21.242.10 15:27, September 29, 2010 (UTC)
yes The change would be like a Super Stimpak- It might seem good at first, but it'll sting later- for emergency use only. And I know this site is not in an emergency LordDeathkeeper 00:04, September 24, 2010 (UTC)

yesGardimuer I would hate to see the Vault's layout changed to something so blogish, and the lack of easy navigation is a real bummer. Since the Vault began as a separate project from Wikia I think Wikia should respect the Vault's choice the same way they plan to for Uncyclopedia.

yes"We are born in the Vault, we live in the Vault, and we die in the Vault." We need no change here, the Vault works how it is, people are usede to it.JASPER//"Do you like hurting other people?" 21:04, September 23, 2010 (UTC)

yes its good already, why change something thats been so easy to navigate for a long time now, to something more confusing and odd? pepsilova141414BOOM board--J*n*K 22:11, September 23, 2010 (UTC)

yes As was said earlier, if it aint broke dont fix it. the new look skin is ugly and harder to navigate Clueless93 16:59, October 11, 2010 (UTC)

yes that was the blandest thing I've ever seen, the red dead wiki used to be... RED and full of character, now its boring not too mention different to use. I say keep what we have and avoid having to adjust to something new... and ugly. Apocalyptic Anomoly 22:36, September 23, 2010 (UTC)

yes Don't fix what ain't broke; we should keep the old design. KingArmery 23:06, September 23, 2010 (UTC)

yes The current design is perfect. The new design looks messy and disorganized to me, and I wouldn't want to see The Vault tarnished with it's hideousness.
Wasteland Ponderer 23:16, September 23, 2010 (UTC)

neutral Some aspects of the 'new look' are good, most are bad, but it's still in 'beta', so there's still hope that they'll fix the things we don't like. All we need to do is give them feedback and pray that they'll listen. Also, check out this blog to see all the wikis that are currently testing the 'new look'. --Anontalk 23:34, September 23, 2010 (UTC)

yes The workload to overhaul our templates would be crippling. Plus, we look really great now. Don't let a new aesthetic break The Vault.--Gothemasticator 22:27, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

yes I like this skin it's better we should keep it. --Knight Captain Kerr 21:44, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

yes I hope you all realize that this isn't going to work. The new skin is not going to be optional; the only reason Uncyclopedia is getting a reprieve is both because it has a lot of clout and because its look and feel are essential to its being a parody of Wikipedia. Anyway, Monobook is the only skin that will remain as a personal option; Monaco is going the way of the dodo as soon as the beta is over. As much as it sucks, eventually every wiki on the site will be forced to use this skin no matter what the actual users want - the 99% negative feedback hasn't stopped them yet, and there's no reason to think that it ever will. --Pyramidhead 22:09, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

Ok everyone, let's all just give up now. This guy says it's not worth it, so we might as well stop trying, right? Oh, wait, no. --Kris 22:06, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

It's not my fault you're ignorant to which way the wind's blowing. It really sucks, but if 2000+ unanimously negative comments replying to the initial announcement won't change their minds, why should this? --Pyramidhead 22:12, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

If we stop trying, then we'll never know, will we? Take your negativity elsewhere. --Kris 22:17, September 27, 2010 (UTC)

Indeed we may be ingnorent, yes we may be fighting a battle that has been long since lost. But I like this layout, and I'm not letting it go with out a fight. If the Monaco skin is going down, it's going down fighting god damn it. Who's with me?!JASPER//"Do you like hurting other people?" 16:48, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

yes This protest may be futile in the long run, but I fail to see any substantial improvement in this system that would justify the confusion it will inevitably create. Keep the present system, let nobody say I didn't do my part. Hal10k 00:50, September 28, 2010 (UTC)

yes Wiki solidarity! The Mass Effect Wiki has followed your outstanding example and started our own petition. Wikia doesn't seem to be listening to the mountains of negative comments they're getting about this, but maybe, just maybe, a few of these will sway them. It's worth a shot, anyways. SpartHawg948 10:01, September 29, 2010 (UTC)

yes Current skin is much more functional than 'New Look', so Vault should definitely keep this one. AlienOfTheWastes 18:49, October 2, 2010 (UTC)

yes Current theme is really boring, light OK but boring. One little example who dose'nt work for the new theme : the search string dosen't propose choices whene typing a word. And page formatting is so ... inline. Tables aren't formatted and are hard to read.

no This place managed to survive without all these ads before. The skin is fine, but the banners and other adverts everywhere make it a lot more annoying to use. Are all of them really necessary? Like the "Sponsored Link" sections? I doubt wikia will pay attention, but they've lost my contributions (not that that makes a drop of difference) It also takes a bit longer to load, but who cares right? Play it Hardcore! 86.142.177.111 08:45, October 6, 2010 (UTC)

yes Man, I'm gone for like two weeks and this is what happens... I'm guessing it ultimately won't matter, but I'll toss my virtual vote in anyway. What did our poor Monaco skin do to deserve this? Ribbity104 05:36, October 7, 2010 (UTC)

yes Doesn't need to be changed. Audex+ 15:52, October 9, 2010 (UTC)

yes I can't find a damn thing on the new look, plus the new just ain't as purrty.--Billytheboy 14:24, October 10, 2010 (UTC)

yes This is my first time voting but I had to make my voice heard. I like the current skin. The fonts look better. The logo looks better. I could go on and on but I won't. Wikipedia's new skin looks slightly better than the old one but I can't say the same for this new one here. I like the green sidebar and everything about the current skin except for the obtrusive ads. Unfortunately, the ads aren't going away anytime soon. BrentH27 00:15, October 11, 2010 (UTC)

yes I currently like the Skin we have, it's easy to navigate through and it looks great with this wiki. ---bleep196- 00:30, October 11, 2010 (UTC)

yes I have grown very comfortable with the current skin, however if it DID change my only complaint is the text is very small. Dante Aligheri 07:15, October 11, 2010 (UTC)

Shouldn't this poll be over, since they said in the Wiki Digest that in a month there will no longer be an option to have monaco? Nukey(talk) 00:39, October 3, 2010 (UTC)

There is an additional option. Several wikis have decided to leave Wikia in order to protectand move to a different Wiki hosting site. They have together formed the Anti Wikia Alliance, consisting of various wikis including Halopedia, Wikisimpson and the Call of Duty wiki. Several other large wikis including WoW wiki are already pending for a move out of Wikia. I'm a member of this "alliance", and If negotiations fail, I advise you to consider joining the Alliance and leave Wikia as well. See their forum page here:[1]Ldude893 02:05, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

The Call of Duty wiki has not left wikia. As an active editor there, i should know. YuriKaslov 02:09, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

To that end, Halopedia, currently, is for the most part against moving from wikia. YuriKaslov 02:27, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

Quitters and fools, they are. We're going to continue to fight, regardless of the outcome. NittyTok. 02:29, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

Not many people, with the exception of the ones who moved their wiki to wikia after some event in the past that forced them from independance, are for moving away from wikia. YuriKaslov 02:32, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

Even by those standards, that means WoWWiki, Memory Alpha, and Zeldapedia should be getting ready to leave.

As well as us; we started out at Sierra Army Depot, then Duck and Cover. NittyTok. 02:34, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

But not enough people from the Days of Yore remain to really affect the outcome of a move to leave wikia. YuriKaslov 02:39, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

For us, the people from the Days of Yore are me, Porter, Ausir, and Grizzly. Kingclyde is gone, Killzig has better things to do. Game widow is with us if she's still around anywhere. And that's it. NittyTok. 02:47, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

We should move back to DAC if we fail. Tezzla Cannon 16:28, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

I guess we're lucky with the fallout community, we've got the right balance of Size and Fanatasim that if it does come to jump, we can. Perhaps we need to setup a fighting fund to look at alternative options - It would be great to have a wiki that isn't asking me to sponsor pages. Agent c 00:59, October 5, 2010 (UTC)

We can't go to DAC; DAC doesn't have the kind of servers to accomodate the massive amount of users we have. I'd doubt that NMA could handle it either.

We could ask Bethesda to take us in; Beth was looking to make their own Fallout wiki when F3 was released, and Wikia gave Ausir the benefit of the doubt and turned Beth down. Of course, that'd be its own massive can of worms, because we wouldn't get to talk about the Bethesda v. Interplay suit, or get to say much of anything negative about F3... NittyTok. 01:05, October 5, 2010 (UTC)

Either way, from what I'm reading on other wikis time is running out. It can't hurt to maybe setup some kind of some kind of fact finding committee to investigate the other options out there - It can't hurt to start asking questions and helps shows seriousness. Its clear from the poll which way this vote is going, perhaps its time for a little action? Agent c 01:37, October 5, 2010 (UTC)

Firstly, We're not costing anyone anything by asking questions. Second, if it comes down to the Vault Leaving because of Wikia's refusal to listen to its users, then again we're not costing anyone anything - its Wikia that's doing that. If you walk into a Biker bar calling everyone you see a pansy, then you can't blame the patrons for punching you in the nose Agent c 01:57, October 5, 2010 (UTC)

No, I don't think you get it. We literally can't leave without such and such editors. NittyTok. 02:01, October 5, 2010 (UTC)

Well, it looks like they have made it one click to get to Recent Changes, which is good. Oh. Scratch that. It's only one click from the home page. Not from articles. So, major concern is navigability. We've got a great amount of navigation points in our current monaco layout. Other concerns are less important but annoying. The lack of clean separation between article-space and other space bothers me. The size of the header-space and the sidebar concern me. But mainly it's the limited one-click navigation points.--Gothemasticator 02:19, October 5, 2010 (UTC)

We can't just leave everything that we all worked on in the past and move (at least I don't think so) we shouldn't even think about doing something as drastic as that. p3p51boom-board 18:21, October 4, 2010 (UTC)

Oh no, nothing like that. If we were to move, we just download the data dump and re-upload it to another MediaWiki site. That'll save every single revision and user account. NittyTok. 02:25, October 5, 2010 (UTC)

Porter21 just made an excellent plea in the beta forums in defense of the Vault's side navigation bar. I really wish I could share it, but so it goes. Here's hoping Wikia listens to him. ~ Gardimuer{ʈalk } 20:23, October 5, 2010 (UTC)

"Update 2: The New Look has been rolled out on the Vault. Like it? Hate it? Please be sure to vote on it!"
Huh? What you talking about Nitty? Every thing looks the same for me?JASPER//"Do you like hurting other people?" 20:36, October 6, 2010 (UTC)

You need to enable it in your preferences to see it. YuriKaslov 20:39, October 6, 2010 (UTC)

Just turned it on, and back off again. Clearly this change is a Dominion plot, as the Vault in the new skin can only have been designed by a Vorta - no asthetic sense at all. Its hideous.Agent c 01:05, October 8, 2010 (UTC)

I enabled the new skin for a while... It's annoying because it's not instinctual like the current skin. Why wouldn't they make it user friendly? Didn't anyone working for Wikia take a web design class? The main point of wikis, which is finding articles, is harder to do with the new skin. The search box is basically hidden. Grumble grumble grumble. Glomulus 07:25, October 9, 2010 (UTC)

Feedback

If you have feedback about the new skin, please use the green triangle in the top left of the Red Dead wiki with the new look skin, so that it can be taken into consideration when designing its final version. Ausir(talk) 20:56, September 26, 2010 (UTC)

Hi All, Just wanted to stop by and check in with the community here. The green feedback button is gone now that private beta is over, but you can send in bug reports and feedback to Special:contact. I see that the admins here have already done a custom theme which looks awesome! Let me know if you have any questions. Cheers, --Sarah(Help Forum) (blog) 22:40, October 15, 2010 (UTC)

No Comment on the near unanimous poor review here? Agent c 22:59, October 15, 2010 (UTC)

It's no use, Sarah's not coming back to check replies. I'm half convinced that this was an automated message, or at the very least a cut-and-paste response. At least WoWWiki got customized attention.

Hi, I understand that some users are not happy with the change, and we have discussed many of these points both locally on wikis and on the staff blog. I wrote you here, as I am writing many wikis, to see if there is anyway we can assist in making this a smooth transition. That offer still stands. Cheers, --Sarah(Help Forum) (blog) 00:09, October 16, 2010 (UTC)

Yet we still see a refusal to learn from the lesson of New Coke.

Back in the height of the Cola Wars, Coke decided to respond to the Pepsi Challenge by reinventing a classic, making a "Cole" that was better than both "Coke" and "Pepsi".

According the the folks in the blind taste test, they succeded. The panels indeed preferred the taste of "New Coke" over both Coke, and Pepsi. Excited by this result, the Coca Cola company decided to roll it out all over the states, and discontinue the original - who would want that after trying the new, better coke?.

Cola fans all over America were outraged! Not only had the Coca Cola company committed sacrilege by creating a new coke - but the "old" coke was going away forever. Despite a massive campaign calling for either a step back, or at least for the old coke to stay available, the Coca Cola company executives knew better, and refused to bend.

As it was released, Cola fans across America stocked up what they could on the original formula. When stores ran out, they switched to Pepsi. People feel close to "their brands" and coke had betrayed them.

Sales of New Coke simply didn't take off. Facing poor sales, the executives did the impossible - they brought back "Classic Coke". Classic coke sales were good, New coke sales continued to fall, and fast food outlets stopped stocking "New Coke".

Today, you'll find New Coke in three places - Its sold in two of these: Micronesia and American Samoa (Where its sold as "Coke II", side by side with the original); The Third place is in Marketing Textbooks, where its often described as the greatest marketing disaster in history.

The questions remain - Could a New Coke have made it if handled correctly? If the "true cola fans" were not faced with the loss of "Classic Coke" and didn't mobilze their forces against it, would sales of the New Coke have been high, perhaps high enough to over time force out the original?

Its a shame, as humans, we refuse to take another persons lesson as our own.Agent c 00:29, October 16, 2010 (UTC)

Question. Nitty says switch to Monobook. Will we be able to keep the monobook skin? I thought Wiki was getting rid of everything that wasn't the new one. At any rate, Monobook is still miles better than the new skin. Glomulus 00:19, October 17, 2010 (UTC)

We will be keeping Monobook, as far as I know. NittyTok. 00:21, October 17, 2010 (UTC)

Oh, good. I might not have to avoid wikis like the plague, then. Glomulus 00:22, October 17, 2010 (UTC)